Z-3711-A Staff AnalysisDOWNTOWN PLANNING REZONINGS
Owner: Various
Applicant: City of Little Rock
Location: In an area from Scott to Commerce, Roosevelt
to 15`h Street and 15`h to 16`h Street from
Cumberland to Commerce.
Request: Rezone from R-5 and C-3 to R-4.
Size•
Existing Use: Single Family, Duplex and Vacant
SURROUNDING LAND USE AND ZONING:
North - Multifamily and Single Family; zoned MR
South - Single Family; zoned R-4
East - Commercial, Multifamily, Nursing Home; zoned Capitol
Zone "N", "0" and "M".
West - Single Family and Duplex; zoned R-4
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION NOTIFICATION:
The east of Broadway and Downtown Neighborhood Associations
were represented on the Committee which identified the
tracks for reclassification. No additional notice was
provided.
LAND USE ELEMENT:
The locations are within the Central City District. The
Land Use Plan recommends Single Family and Mixed Use for the
locations in question. The proposed zoning is more in
conformance with the adopted Plan for the area.
TAFF ANALYSIS:
As part of the Neighborhood Plan process, the Committee was
asked to review the existing zoning pattern for
appropriateness. Several areas were identified as
inappropriate based on the existing use and the adopted Land
Use Plan. However, the committee generally felt comfortable
with the existing zoning pattern. The major concern was how
areas zoned "R-5" could be developed. Based on previous
developments, large areas of "R-5" were perceived to be
harmful. The Committee wishes to assure that any new
development is designed and sited so as to complement and
fit the existing neighborhood. The Committee does wish to
allow for the addition of accessory residential units and
some conversion is considered appropriate; however, the
DOWNTOWN PLANNING REZONINGS (Cont.)
conversion of a city block from single family to high
density multifamily is not viewed as appropriate.
The "C-3" General Commercial at 15th and Commerce is shown on
the Plan as residential and is currently used for
residential homes. The second "C-3" area is along 218t
Street. It is shown for Mixed Use on the Plan and the
parcels in question are used as homes or are vacant. The
desire for this location is that residential use be
encouraged. Commercial is excepted if it is designed to be
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in use and
architectural design.
The reclassifications are as follows:
Z -3711-A R-5 to R-4
West of Cumberland from 16th to
17th Streets (Use: Single
Family; Plan: Low Density
Residential)
Z -4510-B C-3 to R-4
Southwest corner 15th and
Commerce Streets (Use: Single
Family; Plan: Low Density
Residential)
Z-6615 R-5 to R-4
East of Cumberland 15th to 20th
Streets (Use: Single Family,
Duplex and Vacant; Plan: Low
Density Residential and Single
Family)
Z-6616 C-3 to R-4
Along 21°t Street, Park Lane to
Cumberland (Use: Single Family
and Vacant; Plan: Mixed Use)
Z-6617 R-5 to R-4
West of Cumberland, 20th to 17th
Streets (Use: Single Family and
Duplex; Plan: Single Family)
Z-6618 R-5 to R-4
Along Scott, 22nd to 25th Streets
(Use: Single Family, Duplex and
Vacant; Plan: Single Family)
Staff obtained ownership information for the identified
tracks of land. The property owners were notified over the
summer about a possible reclassification. Several owners
indicated they wished to have their property remain zoned
with the current classification. These properties have been
removed from the rezoning request.
A second letter notifying the owners of this hearing was
mailed in early January. An owner wishing to be removed
after this mailing will be listed at the public hearing.
K
DOWNTOWN PLANNING REZONINGS (Cont.
The reclassification are consistent with the existing use
and adopted Land Use Plan for the area. Further the
property owners do not oppose the reclassification. (If any
property owner notifies us after printing of the agenda,
Staff will ask the Commission to remove their property at
the hearing prior to a vote.)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 4, 1999)
The item was placed on Consent Agenda for approval. By
unanimous vote (10-0, Nunnley absent) the item was approved.
3